* Rape victim, Rapist, Catmeat mufti:
Incitement, moral and ideological support for rape of infidel women.
Ian Moore: Court frets about the rapist, not his victim
The state’s ability to bring criminals to justice has been harmed
Ian Moore, with thanks to the Australian
THE decision of the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal in finding that senior prosecutor Margaret Cunneen should be removed from the retrial of a convicted rapist has, if nothing else, illustrated the prescience of her remarks to law students at Newcastle University in 2005.
In her Sir Ninian Stephen lecture, Cunneen questioned whether courts had become obsessed with the rights of the accused at the cost of the rights of the victim. She cited examples in establishing her thesis, including technicalities used by defence lawyers that had resulted in a number of retrials. Her point was that the technicalities flew in the face of the weight of evidence against the accused. She also spoke to students about the admissibility of evidence in a series of brutal gang rapes perpetrated by young Muslims in southwestern Sydney, which she prosecuted.
“Perhaps it is time for us to consider whether public confidence in the courts is now being eroded by the perception that the pendulum has swung rather too far in the direction of the protection of the rights of the accused person,” Cunneen said.
The decision of the appeal court has shown just how far it has swung. While the decision may be applauded in legal circles as an example of the impartiality of the judicial system, in the court of common sense it has done nothing to serve the course of justice and has impugned the reputation of one of NSW’s leading prosecutors.
Cunneen was the prosecutor appointed to the retrial of a rapist known as MG, who had been convicted of two other rapes and is serving 15 years in prison along with the notorious Bilal Skaf. Defence lawyers applied to prevent Cunneen from prosecuting in the retrial because they believed her comments to students in 2005 regarding evidence against MG indicated she was biased against their client.
The appeal court upheld the application, with a non-publication order on the decision until the conclusion of the retrial.
So let us analyse the consequences of this decision:
Piers Akerman, one of Australia’s best-read columnists is also onto it:
THERE is something seriously wrong with a justice system that favors known criminals aged under 18 but goes heavy on upright citizens.
The self-acclaimed leaders of the media, who will be out in force to tut-tut over incursions on press freedom tomorrow night at a dinner to be addressed by Jonestown author Chris Masters, have kept their mouths smugly shut.
They only want freedom for their speech, not that which challenges their politically correct vision of how the world should be.
Jones was found guilty under a rarely used law designed to protect innocent young victims of crime and children involved in criminal activities. The section of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act holds: It shall be conclusively presumed that no child who is under the age of 10 years can be guilty of an offence.
That Act defines a child as a person under the age of 18. Tell that to the train drivers who had a brick thrown at the front of their train, or try convincing a victim of the mobs now ruling George St, that those responsible for bashing them cannot be guilty because they were too young.
The law against publishing is even more ridiculous, prohibiting naming individuals even when they are dead at the time of publication or broadcast.
It means, as one legal eagle has said, that should the premier of NSW have a child murdered by al-Qaeda, that child’s identity could not be disclosed by the press during any subsequent court action.
Jones’ case involved members of a large Pakistani Muslim family, four of whom are convicted gang rapists and their late father was facing perjury charges when he died.
The court heard that on April 10, 2004, a car thumping with loud music and bearing the number plate “ON DOLE” attracted some rude gestures from passengers in a taxi. The driver cut the taxi off at the next lights and at least two people got out and attacked the taxi and its occupants.
One of them, who later claimed to be 14 years old, used a metal pipe.
The taxi driver attempted to defend himself and struck out with a screwdriver, hitting one of the assailants, who later died.